Section Ⅱ Reading Comprehension
In order to “change lives for the better” and reduce “dependency”, George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced the “upfront work search” scheme. Only if the jobless arrive at the jobcentre with a CV, register for online job search, and start looking for work will they be eligible for benefit—and then they should report weekly rather than fortnightly. What could be more reasonable?
More apparent reasonableness followed. There will now be a seven-day wait for the jobseeker’s allowance. “Those first few days should be spent looking for work, not looking to sign on,” he claimed. “We’re doing these things because we know they help people stay off benefits and help those on benefits get into work faster.” Help? Really? On first hearing, this was the socially concerned chancellor, trying to change lives for the better, complete with “reforms” to an obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort from the newly unemployed to find work, and subsidises laziness. What motivated him, we were to understand, was his zeal for “fundamental fairness”— protecting the taxpayer, controlling spending and ensuring that only the most deserving claimants received their benefits.
Losing a job is hurting: you don’t skip down to the jobcentre with a song in your heart, delighted at the prospect of doubling your income from the generous state. It is financially terrifying, psychologically embarrassing and you know that support is minimal and extraordinarily hard to get. You are now not wanted; you are now excluded from the work environment that offers purpose and structure in your life. Worse, the crucial income to feed yourself and your family and pay the bills has disappeared. Ask anyone newly unemployed what they want and the answer is always: a job.
But in Osborneland, your first instinct is to fall into dependency—permanent dependency if you can get it—supported by a state only too ready to indulge your falsehood. It is as though 20 years of ever-tougher reforms of the job search and benefit administration system never happened. The principle of British welfare is no longer that you can insure yourself against the risk of unemployment and receive unconditional payments if the disaster happens. Even the very phrase “jobseeker’s allowance” is about redefining the unemployed as a “jobseeker” who had no fundamental right to a benefit he or she has earned through making national insurance contributions. Instead, the claimant receives a time-limited “allowance,” conditional on actively seeking a job; no entitlement and no insurance, at £71.70 a week, one of the least generous in the EU.
1、21. George Osborne’s scheme was intended to ________.
A provide the unemployed with easier access to benefits
B encourage jobseekers’ active engagement in job seeking
C motivate the unemployed to report voluntarily
D guarantee jobseekers’ legitimate right to benefits
答案解析：
答案精析：由George Osborne’s scheme和intended to可定位至第一段首句，in order to和intended to相对应。该句表示，为了改善民生并减少依赖性，财政大臣乔治·奥斯本提出了一项“先求职，后补助”的计划。此计划旨在降低失业者对失业救济金的依赖，并促使他们积极找工作。故正确答案为B。
错项排除：首段第二句指出，要想获得救济金，失业者必须带着自己的简历到就业中心进行网上注册，并且开始找工作才可以。随后指出，他们还要每周进行一次汇报。由此推断出，失业者想得到救济金的福利更加困难了，A项与原文不符，故排除。原文中提到失业者每周要进行报告，但这只是领取救济金的条件之一，是强制要求，不是自愿报告，也不是其目的，故排除C项。新政策提出了各种条件来限制失业者领取救济金，并非保障了他们获取救济金的权利，故排除D项。
长难句分析：Only if the jobless arrive at the jobcentre with a CV, register for online job search, and start looking for work will they be eligible for benefit—and then they should report weekly rather than fortnightly.
本句是由and连接的两个并列分句。在第一个分句中（破折号之前），Only if引导条件状语从句，only if引导的从句位于句首时，主句应使用部分倒装形式，助动词will需前置，放在主句的主语they前面。条件状语从句的主语是the jobless，之后由and连接了三个并列谓语arrive, register和start，隐含了动作的先后顺序。第二个分句（破折后之后），是简单句，主谓宾结构，易于理解。
句意为：只有当失业者带着简历来到就业中心，在网上注册求职并开始找工作时，他们才有资格领取救济金——此后他们应该每周进行一次报告，而不是每两周。
2、22. The phrase, “to sign on” (Line 2, Para. 2) most probably means ________.
A to check on the availability of jobs at the jobcentre
B to accept the government’s restrictions on the allowance
C to register for an allowance from the government
D to attend a governmental job-training program
答案解析：
答案精析：由题干中的to sign on定位至原文第二段的第二行。根据短语所在句的语意可知，失业最初的那几天应该是去找工作，而不是looking to sign on，这里的sign on应该和找工作的意思相反。根据定位句前后语意可知，失业者需要等到7天之后才可以领取救济金，之后又提到这样做是为了帮助失业者远离救济金从而更快地找到工作。由此可知，此处的to sign on是指登记去领取救济金。故正确答案为C。
错项排除：短语所在句的前半句已经在说失业者最初的几天应该是去找工作，后半句的意思应和前半句相反，而A项的意思也是在鼓励失业者去积极找工作，与原文逻辑不通，故排除。对于是否要求失业者接受救济金的限制，以及是否参加职业培训项目，在原文中均未提及，故可排除B、D两项。
3、23. What prompted the chancellor to develop his scheme?
A A desire to secure a better life for all.
B An eagerness to protect the unemployed.
C An urge to be generous to the claimants.
D A passion to ensure fairness for taxpayers.
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中的prompted可定位至原文第二段最后一句，What motivated him…，原文中的motivated与题干中的prompted相对应，都表示“促使”。由定位句的语意可知，促使财政大臣制定此项计划的动力是对实现“基本公平”的热情，也就是要保护纳税人的利益，节省开支，保证最需要的人领取到救济金。D项中的A passion to ensure fairness for taxpayers是对原文中his zeal for “fundamental fairness”—protecting the taxpayer的同义转述，故正确答案为D。
错项排除：A项为强干扰项，原文前两段都有提到change lives for the better，但原文第一段所指的意思是让失业者的生活变得更好，并没有体现出for all的意思。第二段在change lives for the better之前作者有提到On first hearing，意为“乍一听”，也就是说实际上这并不是真正的目的，故排除A项。财政大臣制定的政策一直都是在强调要让失业者积极地去找工作，而且还限制了领取救济金的条件，并没有说明是在保护失业者，故排除B项。财政大臣为了让失业者更积极地去找工作，增加了领取救济金的限制条件，而C项中的generous（慷慨的）一词和原文意思不符，故排除C项。
长难句分析：On first hearing, this was the socially concerned chancellor, trying to change lives for the better, complete with “reforms” to an obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort from the newly unemployed to find work, and subsidies laziness.
本句的主句是…this was the socially concerned chancellor…，主系表结构，有表强调的意思。主句前的On the first hearing作时间状语，主句后的trying to到句末是现在分词短语作后置定语修饰chancellor，其中complete with... system是伴随状语。system后的that引导定语从句修饰system，用于解释system。
句意为：乍一听，这位关注社会的财政大臣试图通过对这个纵容的社会福利体系进行改革，从而改善民生。现有的社会福利体系对刚失业的人施加的再就业压力太小，从而助长了他们的懒惰。
4、24. According to Paragraph 3, being unemployed makes one feel ________.
A uneasy
B enraged
C insulted
D guilty
答案解析：
答案精析：由题干可直接定位至原文第三段。第三段一开始就表明失业是痛苦的（hurting），之后又说到失业在经济上是可怕的（financially terrifying），心理上是窘迫的（psychologically embarrassing），更糟糕的是失业让养家糊口的收入也消失了。综合所有的表现可知，失业是会让人感到不安的，故正确答案为A。
错项排除：B、C、D三项的感觉也许在现实中会有所表现，但原文第三段并没有说明失业者有这些表现，故排除。C项中的insulted可能会和psychologically embarrassing混淆，但insulted一般指受到外界的侮辱或伤害，并不能指失业者的心理感受，故C项错误。
5、25. To which of the following would the author most probably agree?
A The British welfare system indulges jobseekers’ laziness.
B Osborne’s reforms will reduce the risk of unemployment.
C The jobseekers’ allowance has met their actual needs.
D Unemployment benefits should not be made conditional.
答案解析：
答案精析：本题考查作者的观点态度，需要理解全文意思。作者在前两段指出财政大臣提出的新计划听起来好像是为了让失业者生活更好，但失业者领取救济金的条件尤为严苛，而这真正的目的是想保护纳税人并且节省开支。第三段描述了失业者在失去工作后的内心感受，他们最渴望的是找到工作，而不是像财政大臣说的那样依赖政府的救济金过日子。第四段作者批判了英国的福利政策再也不能保证失业者享受到应有的福利，体现了作者对此项制度的不满。由此可知作者希望失业者可以无条件地享受他们应有的权利，无条件地领取失业救济金，故正确答案为D。
错项排除：原文提到福利制度变得越来越严苛，并且A项内容是英国财政大臣的想法，并不是作者的态度，故排除。原文一直在强调如何激励失业者找工作，以及在失业后领取救济金的制度，并没有说明如何降低失业的风险，B项内容在原文中并未体现，故排除。原文中提到领取救济金的条件变得更为严苛，文章最后一句也说到救济金的金额非常少，根本不能保障失业者的生活，故C项错误，可排除。
Section Ⅱ Reading Comprehension
All around the world, lawyers generate more hostility than the members of any other profession—with the possible exception of journalism. But there are few places where clients have more grounds for complaint than America.
During the decade before the economic crisis, spending on legal services in America grew twice as fast as inflation. The best lawyers made skyscrapers-full of money, tempting ever more students to pile into law schools. But most law graduates never get a big-firm job. Many of them instead become the kind of nuisance-lawsuit filer that makes the tort system a costly nightmare.
There are many reasons for this. One is the excessive costs of a legal education. There is just one path for a lawyer in most American states: a four-year undergraduate degree in some unrelated subject, then a three-year law degree at one of 200 law schools authorized by the American Bar Association and an expensive preparation for the bar exam. This leaves today’s average law-school graduate with $100,000 of debt on top of undergraduate debts. Law-school debt means that they have to work fearsomely hard.
Reforming the system would help both lawyers and their customers. Sensible ideas have been around for a long time, but the state-level bodies that govern the profession have been too conservative to implement them. One idea is to allow people to study law as an undergraduate degree. Another is to let students sit for the bar after only two years of law school. If the bar exam is truly a stern enough test for a would-be lawyer, those who can sit it earlier should be allowed to do so. Students who do not need the extra training could cut their debt mountain by a third.
The other reason why costs are so high is the restrictive guild-like ownership structure of the business. Except in the District of Columbia, non-lawyers may not own any share of a law firm. This keeps fees high and innovation slow. There is pressure for change from within the profession, but opponents of change among the regulators insist that keeping outsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make money rather than serve clients ethically.
In fact, allowing non-lawyers to own shares in law firms would reduce costs and improve services to customers, by encouraging law firms to use technology and to employ professional managers to focus on improving firms’ efficiency. After all, other countries, such as Australia and Britain, have started liberalizing their legal professions. America should follow.
6、26. A lot of students take up law as their profession due to ________.
A the growing demand from clients
B the increasing pressure of inflation
C the prospect of working in big firms
D the attraction of financial rewards
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中的students和take up law as their profession可定位至原文第二段第二句tempting ever more students to pile into law schools。根据定位句语意，最优秀的律师赚得盆满钵满（make skyscrapers-full of money），吸引着越来越多的学生涌入法学院。由此可知，经济回报的吸引力是学生从事法律行业的主要原因，故正确答案为D。
错项排除：原文首段提到了客户对律师行业有越来越多的抱怨，但并没有说明客户对律师的需求在增长，A项与原文无关，故排除。原文第二段第一句提到了inflation，但此处是指美国人在法律服务方面花费的增长是通货膨胀增长速度的两倍，此处的inflation只是用于说明法律行业费用增长的速度快，并不是学生从事法律行业的原因，故排除B项。原文第二段第三句明确指出，大多数法律专业的毕业生无法进入大公司工作，C项与原文意思不符，故排除。
7、27. Which of the following adds to the costs of legal education in most American states?
A Higher tuition fees for undergraduate studies.
B Admissions approval from the bar association.
C Pursuing a bachelor’s degree in another major.
D Receiving training by professional associations.
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中的costs of legal education可定位至原文第三段第二句。定位句后一句指出了法律教育费用高昂的原因：学生必须在其他专业中学习四年，取得学士学位后才可以进入法学院攻读三年的法律专业，最后还要花一大笔钱准备律师资格考试。由此可知，取得其他专业的学士学位和法律专业一点关系都没有，但又是必要条件之一，故正确答案为C。
错项排除：第三段主要讲的是由于学生要攻读一个完全不相关的专业才可以继续攻读法律专业，这是增加教育成本的主要原因之一，和本科学费的上涨毫无关联，故排除A项。原文第三段第三句提到美国律师协会（American Bar Association），但此处的意思是200所法律学院是经过美国律师协会授权的，和获取律师协会的许可无关联，故排除B项。原文中未提及有关接受专业协会的培训的内容，故排除D项。
8、28. Hindrance to the reform of the legal system originates from ________.
A lawyers’ and clients’ strong resistance
B the rigid bodies governing the profession
C the stern exam for would-be lawyers
D non-professionals’ sharp criticism
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中的reform of the legal system可定位至第四段前两句。前两句指出制度的改革对律师和客户都有好处，合理的建议早就被提出来过，但随后第二句中的but表示转折，指出律师行业的相关政府机构太过于保守，不敢实施改革。由此可知，法律制度改革的障碍来自僵硬化的行业管理机构，故正确答案为B。
错项排除：第四段首句提到制度的改革对律师和客户都有好处，但并未提及律师和客户的态度，A项内容无中生有，故排除。原文提到律师资格考试确实非常严格，但并没有说明严格的考试阻碍了法律行业制度的改革，而且第四段第五句也提到希望让学生可以提前参加考试，这是推进制度改革的措施之一，C项与原文内容不符，故排除。原文在第五、六段提到non-lawyers，但这并非指的就是non-professionals，而且原文说的有关non-lawyers的内容是和律师事务所股份相关的问题，文中并没有提及非专业人士的尖锐批评，故D项错误。
长难句分析：Sensible ideas have been around for a long time, but the state-level bodies that govern the profession have been too conservative to implement them.
本句由but连接的两个并列分句构成，but表示转折意义，时态是现在完成时。第一个分句为简单句，主系表结构，for a long time作时间状语。第二个分句的主语为the state-level bodies，后面that引导的定语从句修饰前面的主语，用于描述政府相关部门的特征，表语是too…to…结构，表示“太……而不能……”。
句意为：合理的建议已经存在很长时间了，但是管理这一行业的国家相关管理部门太过保守而无法实施这些建议。
9、29. The guild-like ownership structure is considered “restrictive” partly because it ________.
A bans outsiders’ involvement in the profession
B keeps lawyers from holding law-firm shares
C aggravates the ethical situation in the trade
D prevents lawyers from gaining due profits
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中的guild-like ownership structure和“restrictive”可定位至原文第五段第一句。该句提到诉讼费用高昂的另一个原因是法律行业限制性的行会式的所有权结构。之后对这一体制解释道，除了哥伦比亚地区以外，非律师不得持有律师事务所的任何股份。这使得费用居高不下，创新缓慢。故正确答案为A。
错项排除：原文说的是非律师不得持有律师事务所的任何股份，而不是律师，B项与原文内容相悖，故排除。原文中并没有提到过对律师行业道德状况的评论或批判，C项在原文中没有依据，故排除。第五段最后一句指出，这种体制减轻了律师赚钱的压力，并非阻碍，D项与原文内容相悖，故排除。
长难句分析：There is pressure for change from within the profession, but opponents of change among the regulators insist that keeping outsiders out of a law firm isolates lawyers from the pressure to make money rather than serve clients ethically.
本句由but连接的两个并列分句构成，but表示转折意义。第一个分句较为简单，there be句型，for change from within the profession作后置定语，修饰pressure。第二个分句的主干为opponents…insist…，opponents为主语，insist是谓语。insist后的that引导宾语从句，从句的主语为keeping outsiders out of a law firm，谓语为isolates，isolate sb. from sth.表示“让某人与……隔绝”，to make money rather than serve clients ethically为动词不定式结构作后置定语，修饰pressure。
句意为：律师行业内部存在变革的压力，但监管机构内部反对变革的人士坚持认为，防止法律行业外的人士进入律师事务所减轻了律师赚钱的压力，从而确保他们可以遵从优良的职业道德服务于客户。
10、30. In this text, the author mainly discusses ________.
A flawed ownership of America’s law firms and its causes
B the factors that help make a successful lawyer in America
C a problem in America’s legal profession and solutions to it
D the role of undergraduate studies in America’s legal education
答案解析：
答案精析：主旨题，需要理解全文意思。文章主要针对美国律师行业费用过高而经常遭到抱怨的问题进行描述。文中指出了导致高昂费用的两个原因：法律教育费用过高以及律所中限制性的所有制结构，而且已经有改革措施被提出用于解决此问题，但由于相关政府机构过于死板，改革得不到实施。对于问题存在的原因，作者给出了相应的建议，所以本文主要讨论了美国法律行业中的一个问题及其解决方案，故正确答案为C。
错项排除：A项只是对文章第五段内容的一个概括，限制性的所有制结构是导致问题的原因之一，并不是全文内容的概述，故排除A项。原文中第三段说到成为一名律师需要经历的教育过程，但并没有说明成为一名成功律师的因素，故B项内容错误，排除。原文虽提到了若想攻读法律专业必须先取得一个其他专业的学士学位，但这只是进入法学院的条件之一，文章也并没有对此进行更深的讨论，体现不出本科学习的具体作用，故排除D项。
Section Ⅱ Reading Comprehension
The US $3-million Fundamental Physics Prize is indeed an interesting experiment, as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year’s award in March. And it is far from the only one of its type. As a News Feature article in Nature discusses, a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years. Many, like the Fundamental Physics Prize, are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs. These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields, they say, and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.
What’s not to like? Quite a lot, according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature. You cannot buy class, as the old saying goes, and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels. The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them, say scientists. They could distort the achievement-based system of peer-review-led research. They could cement the status quo of peer-reviewed research. They do not fund peer-reviewed research. They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius.
The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism. Some want to shock, others to draw people into science, or to better reward those who have made their careers in research.
As Nature has pointed out before, there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes—both new and old—are distributed. The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, launched this year, takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include. But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipients per prize, each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research—as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson. The Nobels were, of course, themselves set up by a very rich individual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money. Time, rather than intention, has given them legitimacy.
As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards, two things seem clear. First, most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one. Second, it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere. It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism—that is the culture of research, after all—but it is the prize-givers’ money to do with as they please. It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.
11、31. The Fundamental Physics Prize is seen as ________.
A a symbol of the entrepreneurs’ wealth
B a possible replacement of the Nobel Prizes
C an example of bankers’ investments
D a handsome reward for researchers
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中的The Fundamental Physics Prize可定位至原文第一段首句。该句提到三百万美元的“基础物理学奖”确实是一个有趣的实验，之后作者又提及这种奖项绝不是唯一的。近年来，一系列给研究人员带来丰厚回报的奖项加入了诺贝尔奖的行列。许多项目，比如基础物理学奖，都是由互联网企业家的银行账户资助的，这些账户都有巨额存款。由此可知，基础物理学奖是对研究人员的丰厚奖励，故正确答案为D。
错项排除：首段内容有提到这些奖项是企业家设立的，但是他们的目的是想用他们的财富来吸引在科学领域取得成功的人的注意，并没有表明企业家想把这当成财富的象征，A项曲解文意，故排除。文章第一段只是提到了一些丰厚回报的奖项加入了诺贝尔奖的行列，第二段也说到这些企业家新贵买不到诺贝尔奖的声望，所以不能说基础物理学奖可能取代诺贝尔奖，故排除B项。文章中没有提到任何关于银行家和投资的信息，故排除C项。
长难句分析：These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields, they say, and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.
本句是由and连接的两个并列分句构成。两个并列分句之间的“they say”为插入语，其中they代指第一个分句中的主语These benefactors。第二个分句中的to draw attention to those作目的状语，之后用who引导定语从句，修饰those，用于解释说明这些人的成就。
句意为：这些奖项捐助者说，他们已经在他们各自的领域取得了成功，他们想用他们的财富来吸引人们对那些在科学领域取得成功的人的注意。
12、32. The critics think that the new awards will most benefit ________.
A the profit-oriented scientists
B the founders of the new awards
C the achievement-based system
D peer-review-led research
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中critics和new awards定位至原文第二段。根据第二段可知，一些对新兴科学奖项持怀疑态度的科学家们说到，这些新奖项是对背后的企业家进行自我宣传的一种方式。也就是说，这些批评人士认为新奖项对设立者是最有利的，故正确答案为B。
错项排除：原文内容并没有提到科学家是否以利润为导向，A项在原文中毫无根据，故排除。第二段第五句提到了achievement-based system和peer-review-led research，但此处的意思是新奖项可能会扭曲以成就为基础的同行评审主导的研究体系，这些都在说新奖项的弊端所在，和题目毫无关联，故排除C、D项。
13、33. The discovery of the Higgs boson is a typical case which involves ________.
A controversies over the recipients’ status
B the joint effort of modern researchers
C legitimate concerns over the new prizes
D the demonstration of research findings
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中的Higgs boson可定位至第四段第三句。根据定位句可知，诺贝尔基金会规定每项诺贝尔奖只能有三位获奖者，而且每个人都必须健在，这一限制早已不适用于现代研究的合作性质——当奖励发现希格斯玻色子的科学家时，关于哪位科学家会被忽视的问题就会不可避免地引起争论。由此可知，作者用希格斯玻色子的发现为例来证明诺贝尔奖对人数限制的要求已过时，与现代科学研究体系的协作本质相脱节，故正确答案为B。
错项排除：根据原文可知，当希格斯玻色子被发现时，备受争议的是哪位科学家会被忽略，并不是获奖者的身份，故排除A项。第四段第一句中出现了legitimate concerns，但这一内容和希格斯玻色子的发现并无关联，故排除C项。第四段第三句出现了demonstrated一词进行干扰，但此处的意思是用发现希格斯玻色子的例子证明现代研究的合作性，并不是对研究结果的论证，而且文中也并没有提到论证研究结果的相关信息，故排除D项。
长难句分析：But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipients per prize, each of whom must still be living, has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research—as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson.
本句的主干为…the Nobel Foundation’s limit…has long been outgrown…。句子中间的each of whom must still be living引导非限制性定语从句，修饰three recipients。破折号后面的as引导定语从句，修饰前面的主句，定语从句中同时包含了由who引导的宾语从句和when引导的时间状语从句。
句意为：但是诺贝尔基金会规定每项诺贝尔奖只能有三位获奖者，而且每个人都必须健在，这一限制早已不适用于现代研究的合作性质——在奖励发现希格斯玻色子的科学家时，关于哪位科学家会被忽视的问题就会不可避免地引起争论。
14、34. According to Paragraph 4, which of the following is true of the Nobels?
A Their endurance has done justice to them.
B Their legitimacy has long been in dispute.
C They are the most representative honor.
D History has never cast doubt on them.
答案解析：
答案精析：由题干可直接定位到第四段。第四段最后两句提及，诺贝尔奖是由一个非常富有的人设立的，他决定用自己的钱做什么。是时间，而非设立者意图，赋予了诺贝尔奖的合理性。A项中的justice表示“公平性”，对应原文legitimacy，意为“合理性”，endurance表示“时间上的”，对应原文中的Time，故正确答案为A。
错项排除：第四段最后一句说到是时间赋予了诺贝尔奖的合理性，说明诺贝尔奖的合理性是受到认可的，并非一直存在争议，故排除B项。文章中并没有提到诺贝尔奖是最具代表性的荣誉的相关信息，故排除C项。原文第四段提到了诺贝尔奖也存在局限性，即对获奖人数的限制，这点是受到争议的，并非从未受到过怀疑，故D项表述错误，可排除。
15、35. The author believes that the new awards are ________.
A acceptable despite the criticism
B harmful to the culture of research
C subject to undesirable changes
D unworthy of public attention
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中的new awards和顺序原则可定位至文章最后一段。作者指出尽管一些科学家可能会抱怨新奖项，但有两点似乎很清楚。首先，如果给大多数研究人员提供这样的奖励，他们会接受。第二，钱和注意力都是花在科学上，而不是花在其他地方，这肯定是件好事。批评和质疑这种机制是合理的——毕竟，这是一种研究文化——但奖金发放者的钱是可以根据他们自己的意愿随意使用的。带着感激和风度接受这样的礼物是明智的。由此可知，作者认为新奖项尽管受到批评，但还是可以接受的。故正确答案为A。
错项排除：B项中的culture of research是原词复现，但文中的意思是批评和质疑这种机制是合理的——这是一种研究文化，并不是在说对研究文化有害，故排除B项。文中并未提到新奖项会受某种变化的影响，C项和原文毫无关联，故排除。第五段第二句提到，钱和注意力都是花在科学上，而不是花在其他地方，这肯定是件好事。作者表示认可新奖项吸引公众的注意，并非不值得公众注意，故排除D项。
Section Ⅱ Reading Comprehension
“The Heart of the Matter,” the just-released report by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (AAAS), deserves praise for affirming the importance of the humanities and social sciences to the prosperity and security of liberal democracy in America. Regrettably, however, the report’s failure to address the true nature of the crisis facing liberal education may cause more harm than good.
In 2010, leading congressional Democrats and Republicans sent letters to the AAAS asking that it identify actions that could be taken by “federal, state and local governments, universities, foundations, educators, individual benefactors and others” to “maintain national excellence in humanities and social scientific scholarship and education.” In response, the American Academy formed the Commission on the Humanities and Social Sciences. Among the commission’s 51 members are top-tier-university presidents, scholars, lawyers, judges, and business executives, as well as prominent figures from diplomacy, filmmaking, music and journalism.
The goals identified in the report are generally admirable. Because representative government presupposes an informed citizenry, the report supports full literacy, stresses the study of history and government, particularly American history and American government; and encourages the use of new digital technologies. To encourage innovation and competition, the report calls for increased investment in research, the crafting of coherent curricula that improve students’ ability to solve problems and communicate effectively in the 21st century, increased funding for teachers and the encouragement of scholars to bring their learning to bear on the great challenges of the day. The report also advocates greater study of foreign languages, international affairs and the expansion of study abroad programs.
Unfortunately, despite 2½ years in the making, “The Heart of the Matter” never gets to the heart of the matter: the illiberal nature of liberal education at our leading colleges and universities. The commission ignores that for several decades America’s colleges and universities have produced graduates who don’t know the content and character of liberal education and are thus deprived of its benefits. Sadly, the spirit of inquiry once at home on campus has been replaced by the use of the humanities and social sciences as vehicles for publicizing “progressive,” or left-liberal propaganda.
Today, professors routinely treat the progressive interpretation of history and progressive public policy as the proper subject of study while portraying conservative or classical liberal ideas—such as free markets and self-reliance—as falling outside the boundaries of routine, and sometimes legitimate, intellectual investigation.
The AAAS displays great enthusiasm for liberal education. Yet its report may well set back reform by obscuring the depth and breadth of the challenge that Congress asked it to illuminate.
16、36. According to Paragraph 1, what is the author’s attitude toward the AAAS’s report?
A Critical.
B Appreciative.
C Contemptuous.
D Tolerant.
答案解析：
答案精析：由题干可直接定位到第一段。该段开头提到作者认为美国人文与科学院最新发布的报告《问题的核心》是值得称赞的，因为它肯定了人文和社会科学对美国自由民主的繁荣与安全的重要性。随后用Regrettably（令人遗憾的是）和however（然而）表示转折，指出然而令人遗憾的是，该报告未能解决人文教育所面临危机的真正本质，这可能使其带来的弊大于利。由此可知，作者对此项报告持批判性态度，故正确答案为A。
错项排除：原文首段第一句确实表示了作者对此报告的肯定态度，但随后也表示了一些质疑和批判，作者对此报告的态度重点是批判而非肯定，故排除B项。作者提出了对报告的批判和质疑，但在之前也肯定了报告的可取之处，并不能表现出作者对报告是轻蔑的态度，C项过度引申文意，故排除。作者在第一段最后明确表示这可能带来的弊大于利，并没有展现出作者对此报告的宽容态度，故D项排除。
17、37. Influential figures in the Congress required that the AAAS report on how to ________.
A retain people’s interest in liberal education
B define the government’s role in education
C keep a leading position in liberal education
D safeguard individuals’ rights to education
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干中的Influential figures in the Congress可定位至第二段第一句，对应原文中的leading congressional Democrats and Republicans。该句表示，国会民主党和共和党的主要议员致函美国人文与科学院，要求其确定计划和行动来保持美国在人文和社会科学奖学金和教育方面的卓越表现。C项中的keep a leading position是对原文中maintain national excellence的同义替换，故正确答案为C。
错项排除：原文中并未提到有关保持人们对人文教育的兴趣的信息，故排除A项。原文中提到了政府（federal, states and local governments），但此处说的是政府应该采取什么样的行动，未说明政府在教育中的作用，故排除B。原文中也并未提及有关保障个人受教育的权利的信息，故排除D项。
长难句分析：In 2010, leading congressional Democrats and Republicans sent letters to the AAAS asking that it identify actions that could be taken by “federal, state and local governments, universities, foundations, educators, individual benefactors and others” to “maintain national excellence in humanities and social scientific scholarship and education.”
本句主干为…leading congressional Democrats and Republicans sent letters to the AAAS，为主谓宾结构。句首的In 2010作时间状语。asking后的that引导宾语从句，该从句中it identify使用了should+动词原形，表示虚拟语气，其中情态动词should被省略。action后的that引导定语从句，修饰actions，用于解释actions。句末的to “maintain…education.”为不定式短语作目的状语。
句意为：2010年，美国国会民主党和共和党的主要议员致函美国人文与科学院，要求其确定“联邦、州和地方政府、大学、基金会、教育工作者、个人捐助者和其他群体”可以采取的行动，以“保持美国在人文和社会科学奖学金以及教育方面的卓越表现”。
18、38. According to Paragraph 3, the report suggests ________.
A an exclusive study of American history
B a greater emphasis on theoretical subjects
C the application of emerging technologies
D funding for the study of foreign languages
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干可直接定位到原文第三段。该段提及，报告中确定的目标值得称赞。由于代议制政府以公民具备认知能力为前提，报告支持全面扫盲，强调研究历史和政府，特别是对美国历史和美国政府的研究；并鼓励使用新的数字技术。C项中的the application of emerging technologies是对原文encourages the use of new digital technologies的同义替换，故正确答案为C。
错项排除：原文中提到了要加强对美国历史和美国政府的研究，但作者的表述是particularly“尤其是”，而非A项中的exclusive“只有”，A项曲解原文文意，故排除。B项中的theoretical subjects（理论课题）并未在原文中出现，而文章强调的是重视人文教育，故B项表述和原文内容相悖，可排除。原文第三段最后一句说到报告提倡加强对外语的学习研究，并非是为外语学习提供经费，D项和原文不符，故排除。
长难句分析：To encourage innovation and competition, the report calls for increased investment in research, the crafting of coherent curricula that improve students’ ability to solve problems and communicate effectively in the 21st century, increased funding for teachers and the encouragement of scholars to bring their learning to bear on the great challenges of the day.
本句较长，但其实是一个主谓宾结构的简单句。句首的不定式To encourage…作目的状语，句子主语为the report，谓语是calls for，宾语较长，由四个并列宾语构成（increased investment…, the crafting of…curricula, increased funding…and the encouragement of scholars…），被and连接。第二个宾语中包含一个that引导的定语从句that improve... 21st century，修饰coherent curricula。
句意为：为了鼓励创新和竞争，报告呼吁增加对科研领域的投资、制定连贯的课程，来提高学生在21世纪解决问题和有效沟通的能力；增加对教师和学者的资金经费并鼓励学者们把学到的知识运用到当前面临的巨大挑战中去。
19、39. The author implies in Paragraph 5 that professors are ________.
A supportive of free markets
B cautious about intellectual investigation
C conservative about public policy
D biased against classical liberal ideas
答案解析：
答案精析：根据题干可直接定位到第五段。段中的while表示前后对比关系，重点强调while后的内容。根据语意，教授们把保守主义或古典自由主义思想（如自由市场和自力更生）排除在出常规界限之外。由此可知，教授们对古典人文主义思想存在偏见，故正确答案为D。
错项排除：原文明确表示自由市场是古典自由主义思想的一种，是受到教授们批判的，并非支持，A项与原文内容相悖，故排除。文中并没有提到教授们对intellectual investigation（智力研究）和public policy（公共政策）的态度问题，故排除B、C项。
20、40. Which of the following would be the best title for the text?
A Ways to Grasp “The Heart of the Matter”
B Illiberal Education and “The Heart of the Matter”
C The AAAS’s Contribution to Liberal Education
D Progressive Policy vs. Liberal Education
答案解析：
答案精析：主旨题，需要理解全文意思。通读全文可知，作者对《问题的核心》这份报告进行了背景介绍，之后提出了报告的可取之处以及存在的核心问题，重点是在对本质问题的讨论上。然后又对本质问题的原因进行了说明，并表示报告的内容可能会阻碍教育改革。由此可知，B项最符合文意，为正确答案。
错项排除：文章是对《问题的核心》这一报告的内容进行了分析，并未讲述具体的方法，故排除A项。文章提到了美国人文与科学院完成了《问题的核心》这一报告，但文章主要是针对报告内容进行讨论，并没有具体说明美国人文与科学学院有哪些贡献，故排除C项。文章虽提到了progressive public policy（进步的公共政策），但并没有对此进行深入的讨论和分析，D项内容以偏概全，故排除。
喵呜刷题：让学习像火箭一样快速，快来微信扫码，体验免费刷题服务，开启你的学习加速器！
